Page 3 of 45

 

Problem Formulation for the Environmental Fate, 

Ecological Risk, Endangered Species, and Human 

Health Drinking Water Exposure Assessments in 

Support of the Registration Review of 

Methoxyfenozide 

Methoxyfenozide 

CAS: 161050-58-4 

PC Code: 121027 

Prepared by:

Mary Clock-Rust, Biologist 

Karen Milians, Ph.D., Chemist 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch IV

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Mail Code 7507P

Washington, DC 20460

Reviewed by: 

Jim Carleton, Ph.D., Senior Scientist 

Thomas Steeger, Ph.D., Senior Advisor 

Approved by: 

Marietta Echeverria, Branch Chief 

Date: April 25, 2013 

 
Page 4 of 45

1. Introduction 

The purpose of this problem formulation is to provide an understanding of the environmental fate 

and ecological effects of the registered uses of methoxyfenozide. Methoxyfenozide is an insect 

growth regulator, and works by inducing a premature molt in insects. While there are data 

indicating that the compound does not affect adult honey bees, there is uncertainty regarding its 

potential effects on honey bee brood (larvae). It is currently registered for use on bush berries, 

cilantro leaves, brassica (cole) leafy vegetables, leaves of root and tuber vegetables, citrus fruit, 

cotton, cranberry, cucurbit vegetables, fruiting vegetables, globe artichoke, grape, grass (forage, 

fodder, and hay), green onions, legume vegetables, foliage of legume vegetables, nongrass 

(forage, fodder, straw, and hay), peanut, pome fruits, pomegranate, popcorn, root vegetables, 

soybean, spearmint, peppermint, stone fruits, strawberry, tree fruits, tree nuts, and tuberous and 

corm vegetables (except potato). Additionally, this compound is registered for non-agricultural 

uses on ornamental herbaceous plants, ornamental woody shrubs and vines, ornamental and/or 

shade trees, recreational areas/parks, and institutions (outdoor). 

Methoxyfenozide belongs to the diacyhydrazine class of insecticides that interfere with the 

binding of the endogenous steroidal molting hormone 20-hydroxyecdysosone with its nuclear 

receptor protein complex and, as such, is referred to as an ecdysteroid agonist (Dhadilla et al. 

1998; Shimizu et al. 1997). This non-steroidal ecdysone agonist induces a precocious 

incomplete molt in invertebrates, particularly lepidopterans. After ingestion of toxic doses, 

sensitive larvae stop feeding and the molting process initiates prematurely leading to desiccation 

and ultimately, death. Refer to Table 2 for the chemical structure of methoxyfenozide. 

Methoxyfenozide is formulated as wettable powder and flowable concentrate that can be applied 

at bloom by ground sprayer, airblast sprayer, chemigation, or aerial sprayer (wing or rotor, US 

EPA, 2013). Maximum single application rates of methoxyfenozide can be found for cotton and 

almonds (0.40 and 0.38 lbs active ingredient/Acre, respectively). 

The crops with the most use in terms of total pounds of active ingredient are almonds (28%), 

wine grapes (12%), tomatoes/lettuce/apples (7% each), pistachios (6%), and raisin grapes and 

soybeans (4%). The crops with the most use in terms of total area treated are almonds (21 %), 

wine grapes (11 %), lettuce (9%), soybeans and tomatoes (8% each), apples (5%), and raisin 

grapes and pistachios (4% each) for the period 2007-2011. On average, the states with the most 

agricultural usage in terms of pounds a.i. (active ingredient) applied are California (79%), 

Washington (4%), and Mississippi and Florida (3% each, USEPA 2013). Further details on the 

methoxyfenozide usage profile and history, based partially upon proprietary data sources, are 

provided in the BEAD Chemical Profile (USEPA 2013, Appendix B). 

2. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments 

2.1. Ecological Risk Assessments 
Page 5 of 45

In 2000, two end-use products of methoxyfenozide (INTREPID 80WSP and INTREPID 2F) 

were granted conditional registration in order to address uncertainties identified in the ecological 

risk assessment of methoxyfenozide. The conditional registration requirements included 

(USEPA, 2000): 

- Developing protocols, obtaining Agency approval, and conducting the following studies: 

o Bi-valve (mussel) bioaccumulation study in sediment 

o Avian reproduction study (a 2-generation study or repeating the bobwhite quail 

(Colinus virginianus) reproduction study with addition of measurements of egg 

shell strength)

o Chronic chironomid sediment study using midge (Chironomus sp.) 

o A sub-acute sediment study using mayfly (Hexagenia sp.) 

o Honey bee brood study 

- Three years after use, obtaining approval for and conducting monitoring of surface water 

and sediment in a representative sample of high use areas in proximity to surface water. 

The registrant has submitted the required data to address the uncertainties associated with 

methoxyfenozide use, with the exception of the surface water and sediment monitoring study. 

The Agency has conducted approximately twenty five risk assessments on methoxyfenozide for 

new uses and special exemptions in the last decade; these assessments serve as a basis for this 

problem formulation. The most recent comprehensive assessment conducted by the 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) for methoxyfenozide was issued on November 

10, 2011 (USEPA, 2011) for the proposed use of methoxyfenozide on citrus (national use 

pattern) and root vegetables. The major ecological conclusions presented in the ecological risk 

assessments (ERA) were as follows: 

 There is potential for adverse effects to Federally-listed threatened/endangered (hereafter 

referred to as “listed”) and non-listed freshwater and estuarine/marine aquatic 

invertebrates based on acute and/or chronic exposure. 

 There is uncertainty regarding the potential effects of methoxyfenozide on larval 

development of terrestrial invertebrates, including the potential effects of 

methoxyfenozide on honey bee larval development. 

 Direct adverse effects to birds, mammals, fish, and terrestrial and aquatic plants from 

methoxyfenozide use are not expected; however, given the potential for effects on aquatic 

invertebrate species, indirect effects to all listed animals and plants are possible. 

In the same document, EFED expressed concerns regarding the high persistence and moderate 

mobility of methoxyfenozide suggesting long-term risks above those found in the screening-level 

drinking water assessment. These concerns were particularly due to the expectation that 

methoxyfenozide could migrate to key aquatic environmental compartments and persist for 

extended periods of time. 
Page 6 of 45

2.2. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments 

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) conducted a drinking water assessment of 

methoxyfenozide in 2011 (USEPA, 2011). The estimated drinking water concentrations 

(EDWCs) recommended for use in human Health Effects Division dietary risk assessment were 

based on the globe artichoke use (highest EDWCs of the agricultural uses). The surface water 

EDWCs for ground application were 68.8, 42.4, and 30.3 μg a.i./L (parts per billion; ppb) for 

acute, chronic, and cancer, respectively. The groundwater EDWC was 4.13 ppb. 

2.3. Clean Water Act Programs 

Methoxyfenozide is not identified as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as 

impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. No section 304(a) ambient water quality 

criteria or Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) have been developed for methoxyfenozide.1 

The Agency invites submission of water quality data for this pesticide. To the extent possible, 

data should conform to the quality standards in Appendix A of the OPP Standard Operating 

Procedure: Inclusion of Impaired Water Body and Other Water Quality Data in OPP’s 

Registration Review Risk Assessment and Management Process2, in order to ensure that they can 

be used quantitatively or qualitatively in pesticide risk assessments. 

3. Environmental Fate and Transport 

Based on the classification system of Goring et al. (1975), methoxyfenozide is considered very 

persistent in soil (aerobic soil half-lives ranging from 336 to 1100 days). The compound is also 

characterized as mobile to moderately mobile according to the Food and Agriculture 

Organization United Nations scale, with organic carbon partition coefficients (Koc) ranging from 

219 to 922 mL/goc and soil partition coefficients (Kd) ranging from 1.1 to 6.2 mL/g. Because of 

its resistance to degradation and its mobility, methoxyfenozide has the potential to move off the 

site of application by leaching, runoff and/or movement with eroded sediment, and to 

subsequently accumulate in aquatic systems. 

Methoxyfenozide is stable to abiotic routes of degradation, but degrades slowly by aerobic soil 

metabolism. Methoxyfenozide is non-volatile (based on its Henry’s constant of 1.6 x10-9

atm·m3·mole-1), hydrophobic (based on logarithm of the octanol-water partition coefficient; log 

Kow=3.72), and possesses moderate water solubility (3.3 mg/L at 25°C). Although present only 

in low relative amounts (i.e. equivalent to less than 10% of applied radioactivity), identified 

transformation products formed in fate studies were RH-131154, RH-117236, and CO2, all of 

which are discussed below. Table 1 provides a summary of chemical and environmental fate 

properties of methoxyfenozide. 

 

1 http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_nation_cy.cause_detail_303d?p_cause_group_id=885 

2 http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/ppdc/2006/november06/session1-sop.pdf
Page 7 of 45

Table 1. Chemical Properties and Environmental Fate Parameters of Methoxyfenozide.

Parameter Value Description Reference 

Chemical Classification Diacylhydrazine -- 

Molecular Formula C22H28N2O3 -- 

PC Code 121027 -- 

Chemical Name 

(IUPAC) 

n-tert-butyl-N’-[2-methyl-3-

methoxybenzoyl]-3,5-

dimethylbenzohydrazide 

-- 

Chemical Name (CAS) 

3-methoxy-2-methylbenzoic acid 2-(3,5-

dimethylbenzoyl)-2-(1,1-

dimethylethyl)hydrazide

-- 

CAS Number 161050-58-4 -- 

Pesticide Classification Insecticide -- 

USEPA, 2000 

Molecular Weight 368 g/mol -- 

Physical State white powder -- 

Water Solubility (ppm) 3.3 at 25oC Moderately soluble 

Vapor pressure (25oC) 2.0 x 10-8 torr Not likely to volatilize 

from dry surfaces 

Henry's Law Constant 1.62 x10-9 atm· m 3·mole -1 (Calculated) 

Not likely to volatilize 

from water or wet 

surfaces 

Octanol/Water 

Partition, Kow

5248 (log Kow = 3.72) Hydrophobic-potential 

to bioaccumulate 

Persistence 

Hydrolysis Stable at pH levels of 5, 7, and 9 in a 30 

day study period 

No degradation 

observed MRID 441444-30 

Direct photolysis in 

water at pH 7 

t1/2= 77 days at pH 6.6 in pond water. 

Degradates were not identified, but were 

present at <5% of the AR (up to 7 

degradates) 

Moderately persistent 

to persistent. 

Studies suggest that 

photolysis is not an 

important degradation 

pathway 

MRID 441444-31 

Stable in aqueous buffer solution (pH 7) 

Degradate RH-131154 was present at 

≤0.56% in irradiated and dark samples 

MRID 44617805 

Photolysis on soil 

Stable 

Degradate RH-131154 was present at 

<2.0% of the AR in irradiated and dark 

samples. 

Persistent 

Studies indicate that 

photolysis on soil is not 

an important 

degradation pathway 

MRID 446178-06 

Aerobic soil 

metabolism 

t1/2 = 1100 days (loamy sand) Persistent 

Studies exhibited poor 

extraction of the solid 

phase and/or loss of 14C 

over time. 

MRID 446178-07 

t1/2 = 336 and 722 days in loamy sand and 

sandy clay loam, respectively. MRID 446178-08 

t1/2 = 573 days (loam soil) MRID 441444-32 

Anaerobic aquatic 

metabolism t1/2= 654 days 

Persistent 

Poor extraction, and 

redox and pH 

information was not 

submitted 

MRID 446178-10 
Page 8 of 45

Parameter Value Description Reference 

Aerobic aquatic 

metabolism 

t1/2 = 963 days and 387 days in aerobic 

flooded sandy loam and clay soils, 

respectively 

Persistent MRID 446178-09 

Field Dissipation 

Terrestrial field 

dissipation 

t1/2= 327 days (sand soil, WA) Persistent MRID 446178-11 

t1/2= 139 days (loamy sand, CA), 

151 days (sand soil, GA), and 

92 days (loam soil, TX) 

Dissipates slowly in the 

environment and 

leaching was observed 

(maximum depth of 30 

inches) 

MRID 446178-12 

Mobility 

Leaching and 

absorption/desorption 

Koc and Kd in mL/g 

267 and 4.2, loam soil 

922 and 1.1, loamy sand 

678 and 1.2, loamy sand 

219 and 6.2, loam soil 

365 and 3.8, silt loam

Mobile to moderate 

mobility MRID 441444-33 

Fish Bioconcentration 

Bioconcentration in 

fish (BCF) 

1.1-1.3x for fillet, 16.6-22.1x for viscera, 

and 9.9-10.5x for whole fish tissues Relatively Low BCF MRID 446178-13 

Analytical Methods 

Environmental 

Chemistry Methods 

(ECM) 

ECM: soil (835.6100) 

The method is missing 

the independent 

laboratory validation 

MRID 478099-02 

ECM: soil (835.6100) 

Reviewed by biological 

and economics analysis 

division (BEAD) 

MRID 478099-03 

ECM: Water (835.6200) 

The method is missing 

the independent 

laboratory validation 

MRID 478242-01 

AR=Applied Radioactivity 

Classification of persistency was based on Goring scale, 1975. 

Mobility was described using Swann et al. scale, 1983. 

As mentioned previously, studies indicate that methoxyfenozide is stable to hydrolysis (at pHs 5, 

7, and 9) and to photodegradation on soil. Methoxyfenozide is classified as very persistent in 

soils using the Goring et al. (1975) system, with aerobic metabolism half-lives ranging from 336 

days to 1100 days. Aquatic studies demonstrate that methoxyfenozide is also persistent in water 

under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions. 
Page 9 of 45

Methoxyfenozide exhibits mobile to moderate mobility (FAO scale, 2000), with Kd values 

ranging from 1.1 to 6.2 mL/g, and Koc's from 219 to 922 mL/g. Because of the chemical’s 

persistence, relative mobility, and potential to accumulate in aquatic systems, the registration 

granted in 2000 for its use on pome fruit and cotton (USEPA, 2000) was conditional. The 

conditions of registration required, among other things, a monitoring study to be conducted on 

surface water and sediment in a representative sample of water bodies in high use areas, to 

determine whether multiple years of use would result in accumulation of methoxyfenozide 

residues in water and/or sediment. The registrant (Dow Agricultural Science; DAS) agreed to 

sample for methoxyfenozide residues over a two-year period in two lotic (flowing) water bodies 

(e.g. rivers) and five lentic water bodies (e.g. ponds) in each of the following states: California, 

Mississippi, and Michigan. The monitoring report is expected to be submitted by DAS in 2014 

(USEPA 2011). 

 

In Terrestrial Field Dissipation (TFD) studies performed on sand (WA and GA), loamy sand 

(CA), and loam (TX) soils, methoxyfenozide applied to fields dissipated with DT50s (times for 

50% dissipation of the parent) ranging from 92 days to 327 days. Methoxyfenozide was detected 

as deep as 36 inches in the soil in these studies, at concentrations up to 0.039 ppm, providing 

evidence of leaching. Metabolites in these studies were not identified. 

In a bioconcentration study on juvenile bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus), BCFs 

(bioconcentration factors) were 1.1x for fillet, 22.1x for viscera, and 10.5x for whole fish tissues; 

the majority (84- 94%) of residues depurated by 14 days. Based on these data methoxyfenozide 

does not appear to significantly bioconcentrate in fish; however, uncertainty remains regarding 

the potential of the compound to bioaccumulate in other taxa, e.g., aquatic invertebrates. To 

address this uncertainty, the registrant submitted a bioconcentration study using the freshwater 

clam (Corbicula fluminea). The results of this study indicate that methoxyfenozide does not 

bioaccumulate. When placed in untreated water, the freshwater clam depurates methoxyfenozide 

by 95% in roughly 16 days (The study is scientifically sound and is classified as acceptable). 

3.1. Transformation Products 

The predominant degradates of methoxyfenozide are RH-117236 and RH-131154 (See Table 2

for structures and amounts recovered), however these were found only in low relative amounts (1 

– 6.7% of applied radioactivity) in the fate studies. 
Page 10 of 45 

Table 2. Methoxyfenozide and Its Environmental Degradates 

Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maxim

%AR (

PARENT

Methoxyfenozide 

CAS No.: 161050-58-4 Formula: C22H28N2O3

MW: 368 g/mol Smile string: Cc1c(OC)cccc1C(=O)NN(C(C)(C)C)C(=O)c2cc(C)cc(C)c2 

MINOR TRANSFORMATION PRODUCTS 

RH-117236 

CAS No.:Formula: C21H26N2O3

MW: 354.45Smile string: CC1=C(C=CC=C1O[H])C(=O)NN(C(C)(C)C)C(=O)C2=CC(=CC(=C2)C)C

Aerobic aquatic 

study 446178-09

In CA, 1

(91 d

In TX, 6.7

d) 

RH-131154 

CAS No: Formula: C22H26N2O5

MW: 398.46 Smile string: CC1=C(C=CC=C1OC)C(=O)NN(C(C)(C)C)C(=O)C2=CC(=CC(=C2)C(O[H])=O)C

Aerobic aquatic 

study 446178-09 <1% (36

Anaerobic aquatic 

study 446178-10 1.1% (1

Aerobic soil 

metabolism 

446178-08 446178-07 441444-32

-- 

CO2

CAS No: 124-38-9 

Formula: CO2

MW: 44.01 g/mol 

Smile string: C(=O)=O 

Aerobic aquatic 

study 446178-09 -- 

Anaerobic aquatic 

study 446178-10 -- 

Aerobic soil 

metabolism 

446178-08 446178-07 441444-32

-- 
Page 11 of 45 

4. Receptors 

Table 3 and

4 provide summaries of the toxicity endpoints for aquatic and terrestrial organisms, 

respectively. These values represent the most sensitive species tested within each taxon 

to characterize potential acute and chronic effects of methoxyfenozide. The tables also 

provide acute toxicity classifications. Based on the most sensitive toxicity endpoints, 

methoxyfenozide is classified as moderately toxic to freshwater fish (and to aquaticphase amphibians, for which freshwater fish serve as surrogates), estuarine/marine 

invertebrates and estuarine/marine fish, and as very highly toxic to freshwater 

invertebrates on an acute exposure basis (Table 3). In some cases the acute toxicity 

endpoint is non-definitive and suggests that the potential acute toxicity of 

methoxyfenozide to these species may be limited by the chemical’s solubility (3.3 mg/L 

at 25oC). Toxicity data show effects on survival in freshwater fish exposed to 

methoxyfenozide. The midge (Chironomus riparius), a freshwater benthic invertebrate, 

was the most sensitive species tested on a chronic exposure basis, which resulted in 

delayed emergence and development of the species. No acute toxicity data are available 

for midge larvae; therefore, an acute-to-chronic ratio (ACR) was used to calculate an 

acute freshwater invertebrate endpoint using acute and chronic toxicity data from another 

aquatic invertebrate, the waterflea (Daphnia magnia)

3

. This calculation results in an 

estimated EC50 of 0.05 mg a.i./L for the midge4. 

Green algae (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata) was the most sensitive aquatic nonvascular plant tested, but the endpoint was non-definitive, i.e., the effect concentration for 

50% mortality of the algae exceeded the highest concentration tested (EC50>3.4 mg 

a.i./L), suggesting that the chemical’s solubility may limit its impacts on aquatic nonvascular plants. Data on the effects of methoxyfenozide on vascular plants are not 

available. 

For estuarine/marine invertebrates, chronic toxicity data are available for the mysid 

(Americamysis bahia). In this study reduced growth (length) occurred, with a NOAEC of 

0.025 mg a.i./L. 

Methoxyfenozide is practically nontoxic to birds (as well as reptiles and terrestrial-phase 

amphibians, for which birds serve as surrogates) on both an acute oral and subacute 

dietary exposure basis; the compound is practically nontoxic to mammals on an acute 

oral exposure basis. Past EFED risk assessments used the endpoint of eggshell thinning 

seen in a reproductive toxicity study with bobwhite quail (MRID 446177-11) to calculate 

chronic risk to birds. However, EFED is currently reviewing these and other avian 

reproductive toxicity data, and will use the results of these data to inform the risk 

assessment for birds. No other effects were observed in chronic bird studies. In mammals, 

chronic exposure resulted in histological changes in the liver and in the thyroid gland, 

and there was uncertainty regarding the extent to which methoxyfenozide may affect the 

 

3

 The most sensitive acute and chronic endpoints available for daphnids are an EC50 of 3.7 mg a.i./L (MRID 

441444-11) and a NOAEC of 0.20 mg a.i./L (MRID 446177-14), respectively. 

4

 [(3.7 mg a.i./L)/(0.20 mg a.i./L) = (0.05 mg a.i./L)/(0.0026 mg a.i./L)] 
Page 12 of 45 

hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid axis. Because of this uncertainty EFED recommended 

additional data on amphibians to determine whether thyroid-dependent metamorphosis is 

affected. The registrant has submitted a study of amphibian metamorphosis following 

OCSPP Guideline 890.1100 (MRID 489387-01). 

Methoxyfenozide is classified as “practically nontoxic” to adult honey bees (Apis 

mellifera; Table 4), but has been shown to be highly toxic to target insect pests on an 

acute exposure basis5. Although methoxyfenozide is intended to target lepidopterans, 

there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which other species of insects and taxa 

dependent on ecdysone may be affected. Because of methoxyfenozide’s mode of action, 

larval insects, including larval honey bees, may be more sensitive to methoxyfenozide 

than are adult insects. The registrant has submitted data on red swamp crayfish 

(Procambarus clarkia) and more recently on honeybees to address this uncertainty. 

Exposure to methoxyfenozide did not affect survival, growth (length or weight), total 

number of molts or number of molts per females in crayfish. 

Recently, EFED received three new toxicity studies for methoxyfenozide examining the 

toxicity to African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis) larvae (MRID 489387-01) and 

honeybee brood, as well as a study of methoxyfenozide residues in bee colonies from 

almonds treated with methoxyfenozide (MRIDs 489622-01, 489622-02, 489622-03). 

These studies are under review in EFED, and will be used to inform the risk assessment 

for methoxyfenozide. 

4.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms 

Table 3. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for 

Methoxyfenozide 

Taxonomic 

Group 

Study 

Type 

Surrogate 

Species 

Toxicity Value 

(all units in 

terms of 

measured active 

ingredient) 

Acute Toxicity 

Classification Source 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classification 

Freshwater 

Fish 

96-Hour 

Acute 

Toxicity 

Rainbow trout 

Oncorhynchus 

mykiss

LC50 >4.2 mg/L 

(No mortality at 

the highest 

treatment level 

tested)

Moderately 

Toxic 441444-10 Acceptable 

Full Life 

Cycle 

Toxicity 

Fathead minnow 

Pimephales 

promelas

NOAEC = 0.53 

mg a.i./L 

LOAEC = 1.0 

(survival) 

N/A 446177-16 Acceptable 

Freshwater 

Invertebrates 

Estimate 

based on 

Acute-toChronic 

Ratio1

Midge 

Chironomus 

riparius

EC50 = 0.051 mg 

a.i./L 

(mortality) 

Very highly 

toxic N/A1

 N/A 

 

5

 Trisyono, 1997 
Page 13 of 45 

Taxonomic 

Group 

Study 

Type 

Surrogate 

Species 

Toxicity Value 

(all units in 

terms of 

measured active 

ingredient) 

Acute Toxicity 

Classification Source 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classification 

Chronic 

Effects on 

Midge 

Larvae 

Midge 

Chironomus 

riparius

NOAEC=0.0063 

mg a.i./L 

LOAEC=0.013 

mg a.i./L 

(Delayed 

emergence and 

development) 

N/A 450328-01 Supplemental 

Estuarine/ 

Marine Fish 

96-Hour 

Acute 

Toxicity 

Sheepshead 

minnow 

Cyprinodon 

variegatus

96-hr LC50 >2.8 

mg a.i./L 

Moderately 

Toxic 441444-12 Acceptable 

Early Life 

Stage 

Toxicity 

Sheepshead 

minnow 

Cyprinodon 

variegatus

N/A N/A 446177-12 Currently under 

review in EFED 

Estuarine/ 

Marine 

Invertebrates 

96-Hour 

Shell 

Depositio

n 

Eastern oyster 

Crassostrea 

virginica

96-hr EC50 = 1.2 

mg a.i./L 

Moderately 

Toxic 441444-13 Acceptable 

Invertebra

te Life 

Cycle 

Toxicity 

Mysid 

Americamysis 

bahia (formerly

Mysidopsis 

bahia)

NOAEC = 0.025 

mg a.i./L 

LOAEC = 0.051 

mg a.i./L 

(Reduced 

growth/length) 

N/A 446177-15 Acceptable 

Non-Vascular 

Aquatic Plants 

5-Day 

Toxicity 

Test 

Freshwater alga 

Pseudokirchneri

ella subcapitata 

(formerly

Selenastrum 

capricornutum)

EC50 >3.4 mg 

a.i./L 

NOAEC= 3.4 mg 

a.i./L 

No effects at the 

highest treatment 

level tested 

N/A 446177-18 Acceptable 

1 Acute-to-Chronic Ratio (ACR) was used to estimate the acute toxicity for the midge using the ratio of acute to chronic data points 

from studies with Daphnia and the chronic NOAEC from the midge lifecycle test. [(3.7 mg a.i./L)/(0.20 mg a.i./L) = (0.05 mg 

a.i./L)/(0.0026 mg a.i./L)] 

4.2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms 

Table 4: Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for 

Methoxyfenozide 
Page 14 of 45 

Taxonomic 

Group 

Study 

Type 

Surrogate 

Species 

Toxicity Value 

(all units in 

terms of 

measured active 

ingredient) 

Acute Toxicity 

Classification Source 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classification 

Birds 

Acute 

Oral 

Toxicity 

Northern 

bobwhite quail

Colinus 

virginianus 

LD50 >2,250 mg 

a.i./kg-bw 

No effects at 

highest treatment 

level tested

Practically 

Non-Toxic 441444-06 Acceptable 

Subacute 

Dietary 

Toxicity 

Northern 

bobwhite quail

Colinus 

virginianus 

LC50 >5,870 

mg a.i./kg-diet 

No effects at 

highest treatment 

level tested 

Practically 

Non-Toxic 441444-07 Acceptable 

Avian 

Reproduct

ive 

Toxicity 

Mallard duck

Anas 

platyrhynchos 

NOAEC=1,000 

mg a.i./kg-diet; 

LOAEC>1,000 

mg a.i./kg-diet 

No treatment 

related effects. 

N/A 446177-10 Supplemental 

Mammals 

Acute oral 

Toxicity 

Rat 

Rattus norvegicus

LD50 >5,000 mg 

a.i./kg-bw 

Acute Toxicity 

Category 4 441444-15 Acceptable 

Chronic 

Dietary 

Toxicity 

Rat 

Rattus norvegicus

NOAEL = 200 

mg a.i./kg 

LOAEL=8000 

mg a.i./kg 

(Hematological 

changes, liver 

toxicity, 

histopathology in 

thyroid) 

N/A 446177-31 Acceptable 

Terrestrial 

Invertebrates 

Acute 

Contact 

Toxicity 

Honey bee 

Apis mellifera 

LD50 >100 

μg/bee 

Practically 

Non-Toxic 441444-29 Acceptable 

Subacute 

Dietary 

Toxicity 

Honey bee 

Apis mellifera 

LC50 > 100 

μg/bee 

Practically 

Non-Toxic 446177-17 Supplemental 

1 Birds represent surrogates for terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptiles. 
Page 15 of 45 

4.3. Ecological Incidents 

The ecological incident information system (EIIS) is an OPP database that houses 

ecological incidents that have been reported to the Agency. When available, EIIS 

includes date and location of an incident, type and magnitude of effects observed in 

various species, use(s) of pesticides known or suspected of contributing to the incident, 

and results of any chemical residue analysis or other analyses conducted during incident 

investigation. EIIS incidents are categorized according to the certainty that the incident 

resulted from pesticide exposure. The Avian Monitoring System (AIMS)6 is a database 

administered by the American Bird Conservancy that contains publicly available data on 

reported avian incidents involving pesticides. Many of the incidents listed in this 

database are also in the EIIS. 

EIIS returned three incidents for methoxyfenozide. All three were reported bee kills in 

which methoxyfenozide was mentioned. Two reported incidents took place in California, 

and one in New York State (Appendix C). For all of these incidents, more than one 

pesticide chemical was named along with methoxyfenozide. Since methoxyfenozide is 

not acutely toxic to bees, it is unlikely that it was the cause of the bee kills. 

In the Office of Pesticide Programs’ Aggregate Incident Reports, there were no incidents 

attributed to methoxyfenozide. 

AIMS was also searched on February 4, 2013 and revealed no incidents to birds 

associated with methoxyfenozide. Because of uncertainties regarding the extent to which 

incidents are reported to EPA, the absence of incident reports cannot be construed as the 

absence of incidents. 

During the risk assessment associated with Registration Review of methoxyfenozide, 

these databases will be checked again and any new incidents will be evaluated to 

determine if they represent current use patterns of methoxyfenozide. 

Table 5. Summary of Methoxyfenozide Incidents 

Chemical Name 

(Product Name) Crop Date Certainty Location Affected Taxa Application Method 

Methoxyfenozide 

(Intrepid 2F) 

Pistachios 07/26/11 Unlikely Kings County, 

CA 

Honeybees (92 

colonies) Ground 

Orchard/ 

Corn 

Planting 

5/11/12 Unlikely Seneca 

County, NY 

Honeybees (48 

colonies) 

Corn planted 

with air planter 

Almonds February, 

2012 Possible California Honeybees (464 

colonies) Unknown 

 

6

 http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/toxins/aims/aims/login.cfm 
Page 16 of 45 

5. Exposure Pathways of Concern 

For a pesticide to pose an ecological risk, it must reach ecological receptors in 

biologically significant concentrations. An exposure pathway is the means by which a 

pesticide moves in the environment from a source to an ecological receptor. For an 

ecological pathway to be complete, it must include a source, a release mechanism, an 

environmental transport medium, a point of exposure for ecological receptors, and a 

feasible route of exposure. 

The environmental fate properties of methoxyfenozide indicate the following transport 

mechanisms for potential exposure to aquatic and terrestrial organisms: 

 Direct contact 

 Ingestion 

 Spray drift 

 Runoff 

 Leaching 

A risk hypothesis describes the predicted relationship among the stressor, exposure, and 

assessment endpoint response along with the rationale for their selection. For 

methoxyfenozide, the following ecological risk hypothesis is being employed for this 

problem formulation: 

Based on the application methods, mode of action, fate and transport, and the 

sensitivity of non-target aquatic and terrestrial species, methoxyfenozide has the 

potential to reduce survival, reproduction, and/or growth in aquatic organisms 

(i.e., freshwater fish, estuarine/marine invertebrates and estuarine/marine fish) 

and terrestrial invertebrates when used in accordance with the current labels. 

These non-target organisms include listed species as well as non-listed species. 

Potential exposure pathways through drinking water (imbibition) and inhalation were 

screened using the SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) and STIR (Screening Tool for 

Inhalation Risk) programs, respectively. Results from the SIP tool showed this exposure 

pathway to be of low concern, i.e., there were no exceedances of Agency Levels of 

Concern (LOC) (Appendix E). Screening using the STIR model found inhalation 

exposures to be of low concern in birds and mammals, i.e., no LOC exceedances are 

expected via this potential route of exposure (Appendix E). SIP and STIR are described 

in detail at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestrial/index.htm. 
Page 17 of 45 

6. Analysis Plan 

In order to address the risk hypothesis, the potential for adverse effects on the 

environment is estimated. The use, environmental fate, and ecological effects of 

methoxyfenozide are characterized and integrated to assess the risks. This is 

accomplished using a risk quotient (ratio of exposure concentration to effects 

concentration) approach. Although risk is often defined as the likelihood and magnitude 

of adverse ecological effects, the risk quotient-based approach does not provide a 

quantitative estimate of likelihood and/or magnitude of an adverse effect. However, as 

outlined in the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004), the likelihood of effects to 

individual organisms from particular uses of methoxyfenozide is estimated using the 

probit dose-response slope and either the level of concern (discussed below) or actual 

calculated risk quotient value. 

This analysis plan will be revisited and may be revised depending upon the information 

submitted by the public in response to the opening of the Registration Review docket for 

methoxyfenozide. 

6.1. Stressors of Concern 

Ecological Risk Assessment 

The stressors of concern are as follows: 

 Terrestrial Environment: parent methoxyfenozide 

 Aquatic Environment: parent methoxyfenozide 

There are no major degradates in the environmental fate studies, therefore 

methoxyfenozide is the sole residue of concern for both the aquatic and terrestrial 

environments. 

An evaluation of environmental pesticide mixtures is beyond the scope of problem 

formulation because of myriad factors that cannot be quantified based on the available 

data. Those factors include identification of other possible co-contaminants and their 

concentrations, differences in patterns and durations of exposure among contaminants, 

and differential effects of other physical/chemical characteristics of the receiving waters 

(e.g. organic matter present in sediment and suspended water). Evaluation of factors that 

could influence additivity/synergism is beyond the scope of this assessment and the 

capabilities of the available data to allow for an evaluation. The final risk assessment 

will evaluate, characterize, and potentially make use of data available on combinations of 

active ingredients with methoxyfenozide, inert products, and/or environmental mixtures. 

Drinking Water 

In order to bring the drinking water exposure assessment up to date with current data, 

models and simulation model guidance, a new drinking water assessment (DWA) may be 
Page 18 of 45 

conducted to support future human health dietary risk assessments of methoxyfenozide. 

The DWA will be conducted for the maximum labeled use rate in support of the human 

health dietary risk assessment. 

6.2. Measures of Exposure 

EFED will use standard available models (identified in Table 5) to evaluate potential 

exposures to aquatic and terrestrial organisms as described at 

http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/models_db.htm. 

Aquatic exposure estimates will be based on estimated environmental concentrations 

(EECs) generated using the Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM 3.12.2 dated May 12, 

2005) coupled with the Exposure Analysis Model System (EXAMS 2.98.04.06 dated 

April 25, 2005) to simulate a waterbody that is considered representative of vulnerable 

aquatic environments (e.g. ponds and streams in headwater watersheds). Terrestrial 

exposure will be estimated using a model (T-REX version 1.5) that assumes direct 

application to a variety of avian, mammalian and reptilian food items. Exposure to 

terrestrial plants will be estimated using a model (TerrPlant; version 1.2.2) that assumes 

methoxyfenozide drifts or moves with runoff to adjacent habitats. For more information 

on the various models that will be used in the risk assessment see the links as outlined in 

Table 6. 

Two spray drift models, AgDISP and/or AgDRIFT, will be used to assess exposures of 

aquatic and terrestrial organisms to methoxyfenozide deposited in terrestrial and aquatic 

habitats by spray drift. AgDRIFT (version 2.1.1; dated 03/07/2012) is the model most 

commonly used by EFED to simulate spray drift into terrestrial and aquatic 

environments. AgDISP (version 8.26; dated 03/07/2012) is used when a parameter needs 

to be modeled that is not available in AgDRIFT. Spray drift analysis will be an important 

part of the analysis in defining the potential area of effects for endangered species. 

A downstream dilution model (under development) may be used to identify waters 

downstream from a use area that may have EECs high enough to result in a risk concern. 

Such an analysis would be used to define potential areas of effects for listed species. 

 

Table 6. List of the various models and the related taxa for which the models will be 

used. 

Environment Taxa of 

Concern Model(s) Link 

Aquatic 

Fish/ 

Invertebrates/Pl

ants 

PRZM, EXAMS http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/ 

Terrestrial Vertebrate 

T-REX (dietary item) http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestria

l/trex/trex_v1_5_webversion.xlsm 

AGDISP (Spray drift) http://www.continuum-dynamics.com/pragdisp.html 

Plant TerrPlant (Run-off) http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestria

l/index.htm#terrplant 
Page 19 of 45 

AgDRIFT (Spray drift) http://www.agdrift.com/AgDRIFt2/DownloadA

gDrift2_0.htm 

AGDISP (Spray drift) http://www.continuum-dynamics.com/pragdisp.html 

6.3. Measures of Effect 

The most sensitive toxicity data presented in Section 3 of this problem formulation will 

be used to calculate risk quotients for the respective taxa. Any additional relevant 

information submitted by the registrant or found in the open literature prior to conduct of 

the risk assessment will also be considered. The open literature studies are identified 

using EPA’s ECOTOXicology database (ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007), which employs a 

literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial 

plants, and wildlife. The evaluation of both sources of data can also provide insight into 

the direct and indirect effects of pesticides on biotic communities from loss of species 

that are sensitive to the chemicals, and from changes in structural and functional 

characteristics of affected communities. 

6.4. Endangered Species Assessments 

Consistent with its responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency 

will evaluate risks to listed species from registered uses of methoxyfenozide. These 

assessments will be conducted in accordance with standard EPA procedures and best 

professional judgment. The process for evaluating potential risks to listed species is 

further described in the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004) at 

http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/endanger/litstatus/riskasses.htm. 

The assessment of effects associated with registrations of methoxyfenozide is based on an 

action area. The action area is considered to be the area directly or indirectly affected by 

the federal action, as indicated by the exceedance of Agency LOCs used to evaluate 

direct or indirect effects. The Agency’s approach to defining the action area under the 

provisions of the Overview Document (USEPA, 2004) considers the results of the risk 

assessment process to establish boundaries for that action area with the understanding 

that exposures below the Agency’s defined LOCs constitute a no-effect threshold. For 

the purposes of this assessment, attention will be focused on the footprint of the action 

(i.e., the area where methoxyfenozide application occurs), plus all areas where offsite 

transport (i.e., spray drift, runoff, etc.) may result in potential exposure that exceeds the 

Agency’s LOCs. Specific measures of ecological effect that define the action area for 

listed species include any direct and indirect effects and/or potential modification of its 

critical habitat, including reduction in survival, growth, and reproduction as well as the 

full suite of sublethal effects available in the effects literature. Therefore, the action area 

extends to a point where environmental exposures are below any measured lethal or 

sublethal effect threshold for any biological entity at the whole organism, organ, tissue, 

and cellular level of organization. In situations where it is not possible to determine the 
Page 20 of 45 

threshold for an observed effect, the action area is not spatially limited and is assumed to 

be the entire United States. 

6.5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) 

As required by FIFRA and FFDCA, EPA reviews numerous studies to assess potential 

adverse outcomes from exposure to chemicals. Collectively, these studies include acute, 

subchronic and chronic toxicity, including assessments of carcinogenicity, neurotoxicity, 

developmental, reproductive, and general or systemic toxicity. These studies include 

endpoints which may be susceptible to endocrine influence, including effects on 

endocrine target organ histopathology, organ weights, estrus cyclicity, sexual maturation, 

fertility, pregnancy rates, reproductive loss, and sex ratios in offspring. For ecological 

hazard assessments, EPA evaluates acute tests and chronic studies that assess growth, 

developmental and reproductive effects in different taxonomic groups. As part of its 

reregistration decision, EPA reviewed these data and selected the most sensitive 

endpoints for relevant risk assessment scenarios from the existing hazard database. 

However, as required by FFDCA section 408(p), methoxyfenozide is subject to the 

endocrine screening part of the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP). 

EPA has developed the EDSP to determine whether certain substances (including 

pesticide active and other ingredients) may have an effect in humans or wildlife similar to 

an effect produced by a “naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as 

the Administrator may designate.” The EDSP employs a two-tiered approach to making 

the statutorily required determinations. Tier 1 consists of a battery of 11 screening assays 

to identify the potential of a chemical substance to interact with the estrogen, androgen, 

or thyroid (E, A, or T) hormonal systems. Chemicals that go through Tier 1 screening 

and are found to have the potential to interact with E, A, or T hormonal systems will 

proceed to the next stage of the EDSP where EPA will determine which, if any, of the 

Tier 2 tests are necessary based on the available data. Tier 2 testing is designed to 

identify any adverse endocrine-related effects caused by the substance, and establish a 

dose-response relationship between the dose and the E, A, or T effect. 

Under Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) section 408(p), the Agency must 

screen all pesticide chemicals for potential endocrine disruptor activity. Between 

October 2009 and February 2010, EPA issued test orders/data call-ins for the first group 

of 67 chemicals, which comprises 58 pesticide active ingredients and 9 inert ingredients. 

Methoxyfenozide is not among the group of 58 pesticide active ingredients on the initial 

list to be screened under the EDSP. Accordingly, as part of Registration Review, EPA 

will issue future EDSP orders/data call-ins, requiring the submission of EDSP screening 

assays for methoxyfenozide. For further information on the status of the EDSP, the 

policies and procedures, the list of 67 chemicals, future lists, the test guidelines and the 

Tier 1 screening battery, please visit our website: http://www.epa.gov/endo/. 

7. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps 
Page 21 of 45 

EFED presently has sufficient data to conduct a screening-level assessment of the 

potential risks to exposure to non-target organisms. No additional data on the ecological 

effects of methoxyfenozide are needed at this time. Several ecological effects studies 

have been recently submitted for methoxyfenozide to address uncertainties that had been 

previously identified regarding the potential effects on honeybee larvae and thyroiddependent functions (e.g., amphibian metamorphosis), and are under review at this time. 

Tables 7, 8 and 9 summarize the data that have been submitted for the parent compound. 

However, data on the environmental chemistry methods are needed: 

 Environmental Chemistry Methods (ECM) for Water and Associated 

Independent Laboratory Validation (ILV), OCSPP Guideline 850.6100 to 

support terrestrial field dissipation study 

The environmental chemistry method (ECM; MRID 478242-01) for water was classified 

as not acceptable, but potentially upgradable pending submission of an independent 

laboratory validation (ILV) for the method. The ECM study can be upgraded to 

supplemental or acceptable status if an acceptable ILV is submitted to the Agency. 

7.1. Environmental Fate

Table 7 identifies environmental fate studies by master record identification (MRID) 

number that provide data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classifications 

and whether or not further data are needed in order to support risk assessment. No 

environmental fate data for degradates have been submitted; however at this time no 

studies on methoxyfenozide degradates are needed for risk assessment, given the low 

extent to which the degradates form. 

Table 7. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Methoxyfenozide 

OCSPP 

Guideline Data Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications

Are data needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

835.2120 Hydrolysis 441444-30 Acceptable No 

835.2370 Aqueous Photolysis 

441444-31 Acceptable No 

446178-05 Acceptable No 

835.2410 Soil Photolysis 

446178-06 Acceptable No 

835.4100 Aerobic Soil 

Metabolism 

446178-07 Supplemental 

No 

The studies are useful for 

risk assessment despite the 

deficiencies. 

446178-08 Supplemental 

441444-32 Supplemental 

835.4200 Anaerobic Soil 

Metabolism None -- No 

835.4300 Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism 446178-09 Supplemental No 
Page 22 of 45 

OCSPP 

Guideline Data Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications

Are data needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

835.4400 Anaerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism 446178-10 Supplemental No 

835.1230 

Adsorption/desorption 

batch equilibrium 441444-33 Supplemental No 

835.1410 Lab Volatility Study None -- No None 

835.8100 Field Volatility Study None -- No None 

835.7100 

Prospective ground 

water monitoring 

(PGW) 

None -- No None 

835.6200 Terrestrial Field 

Dissipation 

446178-11 Supplemental No 

446178-12 Supplemental 

850.1730 Bioconcentration 

Factor 446178-13 Acceptable No 

850.6100 

Environmental 

Chemistry Methods 

(ECM) and 

Independent 

Laboratory Validation 

(ILV) 

478242-01 

In water 

Not acceptable 

but upgradable Yes 

Independent laboratory 

validation method needed to 

support submitted ECM. 

478099-02 

In soil Upgradable 

No 478099-03 

In soil Acceptable 

7.2. Effects 

Table 8 and 9 identify ecological effects studies by MRID number that provide data for 

each guideline requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not additional 

data are needed in order to support risk assessment. Rationales for the additional data 

requested are presented below Tables 8 and 9. 

Table 8. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Methoxyfenozide 

OCSPP 

Guideline 

Data 

Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications 

Are data 

needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

850.1010 

Freshwater 

invertebrate 

acute toxicity 

441444-11 Acceptable No 

850.1025 Saltwater 

invertebrate 

acute toxicity 

441444-13 Acceptable 

No 

850.1035 441444-14 Acceptable 

850.1075 Freshwater fish 441444-09 Acceptable No 
Page 23 of 45 

OCSPP 

Guideline 

Data 

Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications 

Are data 

needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

acute toxicity 441444-10 Acceptable 

850.1075 Saltwater fish 

acute toxicity 441444-12 Acceptable No 

850.1300 

Freshwater 

invertebrate 

life cycle 

446177-14 Acceptable No 

850.1350 

Saltwater 

invertebrates 

life cycle 

446177-15 Acceptable No 

850.1400 Freshwater fish 

early-life stage 446177-13 Acceptable No 

850.1400 Saltwater fish 

early-life stage 446177-12 -- No Under review in EFED 

850.1500 Fish life cycle 446177-16 Acceptable No 

850.4400 

Aquatic plant 

growth: 

Tier II vascular 

plants 

446177-18 Acceptable No 

890.11003

Amphibian 

Metamorphosis 

(Xenopus) 

under flow 

through 

conditions 

489387-01 -- -- Under review in EFED 

1

 The study was classified as acceptable; however, the NOAEC was non-definitive 2

The study was classified as supplemental; however, data provided in the study report can be used for risk 

estimation. 

3

This study was not submitted in response to the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) test order 

proram. 

Table 9. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Methoxyfenozide

OCSPP 

Guideline Data Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications 

Are data 

needed for risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

850.2100 Avian oral toxicity 441444-06 Acceptable No 

850.2200 Avian dietary 

toxicity 

441444-07 Acceptable No 

441444-08 Acceptable 

850.2300 Avian reproduction 446177-10 Supplemental No 
Page 24 of 45 

OCSPP 

Guideline Data Requirement 

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID) 

Study 

Classifications 

Are data 

needed for risk 

assessment? 

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA will 

Make in Absence of Data 

456528-01 Acceptable 

446177-11 --- Under review in EFED 

850.3020 Honey bee acute 

contact toxicity 441444-29 Acceptable No 

NonGuideline 

Study 

Honeybee subacute 

dietary toxicity 446177-17 Acceptable No 

NonGuideline 

Study 

Honeybee brood 

development 483505-01 Supplemental No 

NonGuideline 

Study 

Honeybee brood 

development 450655-01 Supplemental No 

850.3040 Honeybee brood 

development 489622-01 -- -- Under review in EFED 

850.3040 

Almond orchard 

 study of residues in 

honeybees and 

honeybee products 

489622-02 -- -- Under review in EFED 

8. References 

Literature Cited 

Burns, Lawrence (2004). Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS): User Manual and 

 System Documentation. Ecosystem Research Division, National Exposure Research 

 Laboratory. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA. 

California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) (2003). Methoxyfenozide. Public Report 

 2003-3. Tracking ID Numbers 195668 and 196546. 

California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) Surface Water Database (CDPR 2006). 

Carsel, R.F., J.C. Imhoff, P.R. Humel, J.M. Cheplick, and A.S. Donigian, Jr. (2005). PRZM-3, A 

 Model for Predicting Pesticide and Nitrogen Fate in the Crop Root and Unsaturated 

 Zones: User’s Manual for Release 3.12.2. National Exposure Research Laboratory, 

 Office of Research and Development, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, 

 GA. 

Dhadialla, T. S., G. R. Carlson, and D. P. Le. (1998). New insecticides with ecdysteroidal and 

 juvenile hormone activity. Annual Reviews in Entomology 43: 545 - 569. 

Markle, G.M., J. J. Baron, and B.A. Schneider. (1998). Food and Feed Crops of the United 

 States. Second Ed., MeisterPro Reference Guides. Willoughby, Ohio. Monograph # 86, 
Page 25 of 45 

 199, 244, 507, 524, 587. 

Shimizu, B., Y. Nakagawa, K. Hattori, K. Nishimura, N. Kurihara, and T. Ueno (1997). Molting 

 hormonal and larvicidal activities of aliphatic acyl analogs of dibenzoylhydrazine 

 insecticides. Steroids 62 (10): 638 - 642. 

Trisyono, A., and G. M. Chippendale (1997). Effect of the non-steroidal ecdysone agonists, 

 methoxyfenozide and tebufenozide, on the European corn borer (Lepidoptera; Pyralidae). 

J. Econ. Entomol., 90: 1486-1492. (ECOTOX No.: 64128). 

Goring, C.A. I.; Laskowki; D.A., Hamaker, J.H.; and Meikle, R.W. 1975. Principles od pesticide 

 degradation in soil. pp. 135-172 in (Haque, R. and Freed, V.H. eds.) Environmental 

 dynamics of pesticides. Plenum Press, NY. 

USDA Crop Profiles. Available online at: 

http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/CP_form.cfm 

USEPA (2000). Memo: Conditional Registration of the New Active Ingredient , benzoic acid, 3-

 methoxy-2-methy-, 2-(3,5-dimethylbenzoyl)-2-(1,1-dimethyl)hydrazide 

 (Methoxyfenozide) a New Insecticide, for Control of Lepedopterian Pests in or on 

 Cotton and Pome Fruits. From James Jones (RD) to Susan Hazen (OPP), dated June 9, 

 2000. 

USEPA (2000a). Memo: Proposed Tiered Mitigation for Methoxyfenozide. From Dirk Young 

 and Thomas Steeher (EFED) to Joseph Tavano and Arnold Layne (RD), dated April 10, 

 2000.

USEPA (2000b). Memo: Endangered Species Assessment for the Proposed Section 3 Registration 

 of Methoxyfenozide on Apples. From Arthur-Jean Williams (FEAD) to Arnold Layne 

 (RD), dated June 21, 2000.

USEPA (2001a). EFED Risk Assessment for Section 3 Registration of Methoxyfenozide 

 (INTREPIDTM). From Dirk Young (EFED), Dana Spatz (EFED), and Thomas Steeger 

 (EFED) to Joseph Tavano (RD) and Arnold Layne (RD). DP Barcodes - D249466, 

 D249447, D231307, and D231310. 

USEPA (2001b). Addendum to EFED’s Review of Proposed Protocols for Data Required Under 

 Conditional Registration for Methoxyfenozide. U.S. Environmental Protection 

 Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division. 

 July 25, 2001. 

USEPA (2002). Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate 

 and Transport of Pesticides, Version II. Office of Pesticide Programs. Washington, D.C. 

 February 28, 2002. 

http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/input_guidance2_28_02.htm

USEPA (2004). Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the Office of Pesticide 

 Programs. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Endangered and Threatened Species 

 Effects Determinations, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances Office of 

 Pesticide Programs, Washington, D.C. 100 pgs. January 23. 
Page 26 of 45 

USEPA (2006). Crop Grouping – Part II: Analysis of the USDA IR-4 Petition to Amend the Crop 

 Group Regulation 40 CFR ' 180.41 (c) (13) and Commodity Definitions [40 CFR '

 180.1 (h)] Related to Crop Group 13 Berry. MRID 467975-01. Bernard A. Schneider, 

 Ph.D., March 28, 2006. 

USEPA. (2009). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Methoxyfenozide Section 3 New Uses on 

 Dried Shelled Pea and Bean (Crop Subgroup 6C, Except Soybean), Pomegranate, 

 Popcorn, and Citrus (Crop Group 10). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

 Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division. June 30, 2009. 

USEPA. (2010). Review of draft protocol surface water and sediment monitoring for 

 metoxyfenoxide (MRID: 478099-04). From Chuck Peck (EFED) and Mark 

 Corbin (EFED) to Mark Suarez (RD) and Richard Gebken (RD). DP barcode 

 368685. July 19, 2010. 

USEPA. (2011). Review of Addendum to Site Selection Report with Recommended 

 Alternate Sampling Sites for Lentic Water Bodies in California (MRID 

 47809904) (MRID: 478099-04). From Chuck Peck (EFED) and Marietta 

 Echeverria (EFED) to Clayton Myers (RD) and Richard Gebken (PRD). DP 

 barcode 394308. October 12, 2011. 

USEPA. 2011. Drinking Water Assessment for the IR-4 New Use Petitions for the Use of 

 Methoxyfenozide on Root Vegetables for Crop Subgroup 1B (Except Sugar 

 Beets) and Citrus Crop Group 10. Environmental Fate and Effects Division (K. 

 Milians and C. Sutton) to Registration Division (R. Gebken and C. Myers). 

 August, 2011. 

USEPA. 2013. BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: Methoxyfenozide 

(121027). Memorandum From Don Atwood, Jihad Alsadek and Stephen 

Smearman to Bonnie Alder. Biological and Economic Analysis Division to 

Pesticide Reevaluation Division. January 10, 2013. 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO Pesticide Disposal Series 

8. Assessing Soil Contamination: A Reference Manual. Appendix 2. Parameters 

of pesticides that influence processes in the soil. Editorial Group, FAO 

Information Division: Rome, 2000. 

http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/X2570E/X2570E00.htm. 

Whalen, J., and M. Spellman (1993). Control of lepidopterous larvae on spring cabbage, 1992. 

Entomological Society of America Journal, 18:115-116. 
Page 27 of 45 

Appendices 

Appendix A. Submitted Environmental Fate and Effects Studies 

SUBMITTED FATE STUDIES (as of 11/8/12) 

63-17 Storage stability 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144405 Guo, Y. (1996) Product Chemistry for RH-2485 80WP Agricultural Insecticide: Lab Project 

Number: 96-176: AGDSR-96-176: 33P-95-06. Unpublished study prepared by Rohm and Haas 

Co. 157 p. 

44867601 Young, D. (1999) Product Chemistry for RH-2485 2F Agricultural Insecticide: Lab Project 

Number: 99-188: 14 100 5043: APR-98-210-01. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 

211 p. 

44873402 Molan, K. (1999) Product Chemistry Series 830 Group B Guideline Numbers 830.6317 and 

830.6320: Storage Stability and Corrosion Characteristics of RH-112485 Technical 

(Supplement to MRID 44144403): Lab Project Number: APR-99-141: 1409.37: 29P-98-32. 

Unpublished study prepared by Rohm and Haas Company. 14 p. {OPPTS 830.6317, 830.6320} 

44873403 Leger, A. (1998) Supplemental Report for RH-2485 80WP Agricultural Insecticide Product 

Chemistry: Supplement to MRID No. 44144405: Lab Project Number: 96-176: 98-079: 33P95-07. Unpublished study prepared by Rohm and Haas Company. 42 p. 

161-1 Hydrolysis 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144430 Lin, M. (1994) RH-2485 Hydrolysis Study: Lab Project Number: 34-94-49: 34P-94-19. 

Unpublished study prepared by Rohm and Haas Co. 104 p. 

161-2 Photodegradation-water 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144431 Reynolds, J. (1994) Pond Water Photolysis of (carbon-14)RH-2485: Lab Project Number: 

94007: RPT00180: 34P-94-16. Unpublished study prepared by XenoBiotic Labs., Inc. 94 p. 

44617805 Smalley, J.; Reynolds, J. (1997) Aqueous Photolysis of (carbon 14)-RH-2485: Lab Project 

Number: XBL96081: RPT00289: 34P-96-19. Unpublished study prepared by Xenobiotic 

Laboratories. 80 p. 

161-3 Photodegradation-soil 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617806 Reynolds, J. (1996) Soil Photolysis of (carbon 14)-RH-2485: Lab Project Number: 95044: 

RPT00262: 34-96-35. Unpublished study prepared by Xenobiotic Laboratories. 108 p. 
Page 28 of 45 

162-1 Aerobic soil metabolism 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144432 Reynolds, J. (1996) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon-14)-RH-2485: Lab Project Number: 

XBL94005: RPT00195: 34P-94-14. Unpublished study prepared by XenoBiotic Labs., Inc. 198 

p. 

44617807 Smalley, J. (1997) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon 14)-RH-2485 in a Loamy Sand from 

Ohio: Lab Project Number: XBL95007: RPT00263: 34P-95-43. Unpublished study prepared by 

Xenobiotic Laboratories. 110 p. 

44617808 Smalley, J. (1997) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon 14)-RH-112,485 in Georgia and Texas 

Soils: Lab Project Number: XBL95047: RPT00303: 34P-95-91. Unpublished study prepared by 

Xenobiotic Laboratories. 127 p. 

162-3 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617810 Kim-Kang, H.; Reynolds, J. (1996) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)-RH-2485: 

Lab Project Number: XBL94006: RPT00230: 34P-94-15. Unpublished study prepared by 

Xenobiotic Laboratories. 111 p. 

162-4 Aerobic aquatic metabolism 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617809 Smalley, J. (1998) Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)-RH-2485: Lab Project Number: 

XBL96082: RPT00337: 34P-96-20. Unpublished study prepared by Xenobiotic Laboratories. 

140 p. 

163-1 Leaching/adsorption/desorption 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144433 Carpenter, D. (1996) RH-2485: Soil Adsorption and Desorption: Lab Project Number: 34-95-

134: XBL 94005: 94-224. Unpublished study prepared by Rohm and Haas Co. 209 p. 

164-1 Terrestrial field dissipation 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617811 Dong, L. (1998) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of RH-2485 on Bare Soil in Washington: Lab 

Project Number: 1409.26: 34P-96-28: 34P-96-28D. Unpublished study prepared by Qualls 

Agricultural Laboratory, Inc. and Grayson Research, LLC. 424 p. 

44617812 Dong, L. (1998) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of RH-2485 on Bare Soil in California, Georgia, 

Texas, and Washington (Final Report for California, Georgia, and Texas Sites): Lab Project 

Number: 34P-96-28: 34P-96-28A: 34P-96-28B. Unpublished study prepared by Agvise 
Page 29 of 45 

Laboratories, Inc. and Grayson Research, LLC. 911 p. 

45702701 Deakyne, R. (2002) RH-2485 Long--Term Accumulation Study in Washington: Lab Project 

Number: 34-01-84: 34P-96-28: 34P-96-28D. Unpublished study prepared by Qualls 

Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., Grayson Research, LLC and Centre Analytical Laboratories, Inc. 

508 p. 

SUBMITTED EFFECT STUDIES (as of 2/4/13) 

71-1 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144406 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: An Acute Oral Toxicity Study with 

the Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 129-155: 95RC-0008: 

129/011095/QLD.NC/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 47 p. 

71-2 Avian Dietary Toxicity 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144407 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A Dietary LC50 Study with the 

Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 129-156: 95RC-0007: 

129/91095/QLCSTD.WC/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 

64 p. 

44144408 Campbell, S.; Beavers, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A Dietary LC50 Study with the 

Mallard: Lab Project Number: 129-157: 95RC-0009: 129/011095/MLCSDT.WC/CHP83. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 64 p. 

71-4 Avian Reproduction 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617710 Frey, L.; Beavers, J.; Martin, K. et al. (1998) RH-112,485 Technical: A Reproduction Study 

with the Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos): Lab Project Number: 97RC-0101: 129-159: 

RH112,485M-96-1. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 316 p. 

44617711 Bennett, R. (1998) Avian Reproduction Study of RH-112,485 Technical with Northern 

Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 96RC-0041: RH2485BW-96-2: 96P-043. Unpublished study 

prepared by Ecological Planning and Toxicology, Inc. 256 p. 

45652801 Mitchell, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et al. (2001) RH-112,485 Technical: A Reproduction 

Study with the Northern Bobwhite Quail: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 01RC-0091: 129-

177. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 237 p. 

72-1 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144409 Graves, W.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 96-Hour Flow-Through Acute 
Page 30 of 45 

Toxicity Test with the Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 

129A-125: 95RC-0026: 129/013195/BLU-96H2/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared by 

Wildlife International Ltd. 90 p. 

44144410 Graves, W.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 96-Hour Flow-Through Acute 

Toxicity Test with the Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: 129A-124: 95RC-0025: 129/013195/RBT-96H2/CHP84. Unpublished study prepared 

by Wildlife International Ltd. 90 p. 

72-2 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144411 Holmes, C.; Swigert, J. (1993) RH-112,485 Technical: A 48-Hour Flow-Through Acute 

Toxicity Test with the Cladoceran (Daphnia magna): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 129A112B: 92RC-0028: 129/032692/DAP-48H2/CHP38. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife 

International Ltd. 93 p. 

72-3 Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Organisms 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144412 Graves, W.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 96-Hour Flow-Through Acute 

Toxicity Test with the Sheepshead Minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus): Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: 129A-127: 95RC-0031: 129/013195/SHE-96H2/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared 

by Wildlife International Ltd. 91 p. 

44144413 Graves, W.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 96-Hour Shell Deposition Test with 

the Eastern Oyster (Crassostrea virginica): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 129A-128: 

95RC-0032: 129/012395/OYS-DEP/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife 

International Ltd. 99 p. 

44144414 Graves, W.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 96-Hour Flow-Through Acute 

Toxicity Test with the Saltwater Mysid (Mysidopsis bahia): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 

129A-129: 95RC-0033: 129/012095/MYS-96H2/CHP83. Unpublished study prepared by 

Wildlife International Ltd. 90 p. 

72-4 Fish Early Life Stage/Aquatic Invertebrate Life Cycle Study 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617712 Graves, W.; Mank, M.; Swigert, J. (1996) RH-112,485 Technical: An Early Life-Stage 

Toxicity Test with the Sheepshead Minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus): Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: 129A-134A: 96RC-0044: 96P-044. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife 

International Ltd. 121 p. 

44617713 Graves, W.; Mank, M.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: An Early Life-Stage 

Toxicity Test with the Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas): Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: 129A-126: 95RC-0027: 129/013195/FAT-ELS/CHP84. Unpublished study prepared 

by Wildlife International Ltd. 148 p. 

44617714 Zelinka, E.; Holmes, C.; Martin, K. et al. (1993) RH-112,485 Technical: A Flow-Through 

Life-Cycle Toxicity Test With the Cladoceran (Daphnia magna): Amended Final Report: Lab 

Project Number: 129A-113B: 92RC-0029: 129/032692/DAP-LC2/CHP38. Unpublished study 

prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 108 p. 
Page 31 of 45 

44617715 Graves, W.; Mank, M.; Swigert, J. (1996) RH-112,485 Technical: A Flow-Through Life-Cycle 

Toxicity Test With the Saltwater Mysid (Mysidopsis bahia): Final Report: Lab Project 

Number: 129A-133A: 95RC-0217: 95P-217. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife 

International Ltd. 130 p. 

45702702 Sousa, J. (2002) Methoxyfenozide (RH-2485) Technical: Effects on Early Life-Stage Molting 

and Growth in Red Swamp Crayfish (Procambarus clarkii): Lab Project Number: 12550.6188: 

011267: 86.6234. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 89 p. 

{OPPTS 850.1400, 850.1300} 

72-5 Life cycle fish 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617716 Rhodes, J.; Hurshman, B. (1998) Full Life-Cycle Toxicity of RH-112,485 Technical to the 

Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) Under Flow-Through Conditions: Lab Project 

Number: 43701: 96RC-0184: 96P-184. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Laboratories. 

1246 p. 

72-6 Aquatic org. accumulation- Mollusc 

MRID Citation Reference 

45702704 Dionne, E. (2002) RH-112,485 Technical--Flow-Through Bioconcentration Study with Asian 

Clams (Corbicula fluminea): Lab Project Number: 86.6242: 01RC-0090: 01P-090. 

Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 71 p. {OPPTS 850.710} 

72-7 Aquatic Field Study 

45032802 Giddings, J. (1999) Response and Recovery of Aquatic Communities Exposed to RH-2485 240 

SC in Indoor Microcosms Representing Shallow Freshwater Lentic Ecosystems: Final Report: 

Lab Project Number: 99RC-0052: HBF/MT 09: 86.6233. Unpublished study prepared by 

Springborn Labs., Inc. 295 p. 

123-2 Aquatic plant growth 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617718 Thompson, S.; Swigert, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: A 5-Day Toxicity Test with the 

Freshwater Alga (Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata formerly Selenastrum capricornutum): 

Final Report: Lab Project Number: 129A-130: 95RC-0028: 129/012495/SEL5D2WC/CHP84. 

Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 119 p. 

141-1 Honey bee acute contact 

MRID Citation Reference 

44144429 Kirkland, R. (1995) Acute Contact Toxicity of RH-112,485 Technical to Honey Bees: Final 

Report: Lab Project Number: BIO 166-95: 95RC-0130: 166-95. Unpublished study prepared 

by Bio Research. 52 p. 
Page 32 of 45 

141-4 Honey Bee Subacute Dietary Toxicity 

MRID Citation Reference 

44617717 Kirkland, R. (1995) Oral Toxicity of RH-112,485 Technical to Honey Bees: Lab Project 

Number: 167-95: 95RC-0137: 95P-137. Unpublished study prepared by Bio Research. 59 p. 

141-? Honeybee Reproductive Effects 

48350501 Thompson, H. (2010) Methoxyfenozide: Effects on Honeybee Brood (Apis mellifera) 

Development. Unpublished study prepared by The Food and Environment Research Agency. 

11 p. 

45065501 Schmitzer, S. (1997) Study on the Effects of RH 2485 SC 240 (Insect Growth-Regulating 

Insecticide) on Honey Bee Brood (Apis mellifera L.) (Hymenoptera, Apidae): Lab Project 

Number: 2520031: 98RC-1007. Unpublished study prepared by IBACON GmbH. 34 p. 

850 Aquatic Insect Toxicity – Acute and Chronic Toxicity 

45032801 Kolk, J. (2000) RH-2485 Technical: Chronic Effects on Midge Larvae (Chironomus riparius) 

in Water/Sediment System: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 99P-001: 1007.051.173: 99RC0001. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs. (Europe) AG. 119 p. 

45702703 Stubblefield, W. (2002) RJ-2485 240 SC Toxicity Test Results with the Mayfly, Baetis 

tricaudatus: Lab Project Number: BJK061802: 99RC-0269. Unpublished study prepared by 

ENSR. 7 p. 

44976901 Heimbach, F. (1999) Influence of RH-2485 (tech.) on Development and Emergence of Larvae 

of Culex quinquefasciatus in a Water-Sediment System: Lab Project Number: HBF/CH 37: CH 

14/99. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 31 p. 

Non Guideline Selections 

44617719 Palmer, S.; Beavers, J. (1995) RH-112,485 Technical: An Acute Toxicity Study with the 

Earthworm in an Artificial Soil Substrate: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 129-158: 95RC0030: 95P-030. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 72 p. 

48938701 Amphibian Metamorphosis (Xenopus) under flow through conditions 

48962201 Honeybee brood development 

48962202 Almond orchard study of residues in honeybees and honeybee products 

48962203 Proposed risk analysis for honeybees, based on the two aforementioned honeybee studies. 

 
Page 33 of 45 

APPENDIX B- Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) Report 

methoxyfenozide 

BCP

Label Data Report for Methoxyfenozide as of 01/30/13 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Acerola 

(West 

Indies 

cherry) 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Acerola 

(West 

Indies 

cherry) 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Alfalfa Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS 0.9543 NS NS 7 CA060013 (1) 

Alfalfa Ground Spray 0.2386 NS 0.9543 NS NS 7 CA060013 (1) 

Almond Aerial Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Almond Ground Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Artichoke Aerial Spray 0.2386 4 NS NS 0.9543 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Artichoke Ground Spray 0.2386 4 NS NS 0.9543 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Avocado Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Avocado Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

BeandDried Type Aerial 

Low volume 

spray 

(concentrate) 

0.2386 NS NS 4/YR 0.9543 7 WY120005 

(1) 

Bushberries Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS 3/YR 0.7157 7 62719-442 (1) 

Bushberries Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS 3/YR 0.7157 7 62719-442 (1) 

Canistel Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Canistel Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Carambola 

(Jalea) Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Carambola 

(Jalea) Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Cherry Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.8648 10 62719-442 (1) 

CHERRY Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.8648 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 34 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Christmas 

tree 

plantations 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Christmas 

tree 

plantations 

Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Christmas 

tree 

plantations 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Citrus Ground Spray 0.1789 NS NS 4/YR 0.7157 7 CA070015 (1) 

Citrus Aerial 

Low volume 

spray 

(concentrate) 

0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Citrus Ground Spray 0.1789 NS NS 4/YR 0.7157 7 CA070015 (1) 

Citrus Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS 0.9543 NS NS 14 FL100001 (1) 

Citrus Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Cole Crops Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cole Crops Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Coriander Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Coriander Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Field Aerial Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Field Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Field Ground Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Field Ground Directed spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Field Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Aerial Broadcast 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Aerial Directed spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Aerial Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Ground Broadcast 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Ground Directed spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, Pop Ground Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, 

Sweet Aerial Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 
Page 35 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Corn, 

Sweet Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, 

Sweet Ground Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, 

Sweet Ground Directed spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn, 

Sweet Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Broadcast 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Directed spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Corn 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 5 62719-442 (1) 

Cotton 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Spray 0.1491 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cotton 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Spray 0.4 NS 1 NS NS NS 62719-438 (1) 

Cotton 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Spray 0.1491 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cotton 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Spray 0.4 NS 1 NS NS NS 62719-438 (1) 

Cranberry Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cranberry Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cranberry Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Cucurbit 

Vegetables Aerial Spray 0.1491 4 NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Cucurbit 

Vegetables Ground Spray 0.1491 4 NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Feijoa 

(pineapple 

guava) 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Feijoa 

(pineapple 

guava) 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Filbert 

(hazelnut) Aerial Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Filbert 

(hazelnut) Ground Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 36 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Fruiting 

Vegetables Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Fruiting 

Vegetables Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Grapes Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.7157 10 62719-442 (1) 

Grapes Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.7157 10 62719-442 (1) 

Grass 

forage/fodd

er/hay 

Aerial Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.4771 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Grass 

forage/fodd

er/hay 

Ground Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.4771 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Guava Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Guava Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Jaboticaba Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Jaboticaba Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Java Apple Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Java Apple Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Leafy 

Vegetables Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Leafy 

Vegetables Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Legume 

Vegetables Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS 4/YR 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Legume 

Vegetables Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS 4/YR 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Lime, 

Spanish Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Lime, 

Spanish Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Litchi Nut Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Litchi Nut Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Longan Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Longan Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Mamey 

(Mammee 

Apple) 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Mamey 

(Mammee 

Apple) 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 37 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Mango Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Mango Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Mint/Peppe

rmint/ 

Spearmint 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Mint/Peppe

rmint/ 

Spearmint 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Non Grass 

Forage/Fod

der/Straw/

Hay 

Aerial Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.4771 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Non Grass 

Forage/Fod

der/Straw/

Hay 

Ground Spray 0.1193 NS NS NS 0.4771 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Okra Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Okra Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Onions 

(green) Aerial Spray 0.1789 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Onions 

(green) Ground Spray 0.1789 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

and/or 

shade trees 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

and/or 

shade trees 

Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

and/or 

shade trees 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Herbaceous 

Plants 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Herbaceous 

Plants 

Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Herbaceous 

Plants 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Nonfloweri

ng Plants 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Nonfloweri

ng Plants 

Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Nonfloweri

ng Plants 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Woody 

Shrubs and 

vines 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Ornamental 

Woody Ground Chemigation 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 38 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Shrubs and 

vines 

Ornamental 

Woody 

Shrubs and 

vines 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 10 62719-442 (1) 

Papaya Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Papaya Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Passion 

Fruti 

(granadilla) 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Passion 

Fruti 

(granadilla) 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 6 62719-442 (1) 

Peanuts 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Spray 0.1491 NS NS 3/YR 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Peanuts 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Spray 0.1491 NS NS 3/YR 0.9543 7 62719-442 (1) 

Pecan Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Pecan Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Pistachio Aerial Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pistachio Ground Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pome 

Fruits Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pome 

Fruits Aerial Spray 0.3 00 NS 1 NS NS 10 62719-438 (1) 

Pome 

Fruits Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pome 

Fruits Ground Spray 0.3 00 NS 1 NS NS 10 62719-438 (1) 

Pomegranat

e Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pomegranat

e Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pulasan Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Pulasan Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Radish Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 14 62719-442 (1) 

Radish Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.4771 14 62719-442 (1) 

Rambutan Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 39 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Rambutan Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Root and 

Tuber 

Vegetables 

Aerial Spray 0.1491 NS NS 3/YR 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Root and 

Tuber 

Vegetables 

Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Root and 

Tuber 

Vegetables 

Ground Spray 0.1491 NS NS 3/YR 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Root and 

Tuber 

Vegetables 

Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Sapodilla Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Sapodilla Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Soybeand 

(unspecifie

d) 

Aerial Spray 0.1193 NS NS 4/YR 0.9543 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Soybeand 

(unspecifie

d) 

Ground Spray 0.1193 NS NS 4/YR 0.9543 NS 62719-442 (1) 

Star Apple Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Star Apple Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Stone 

Fruits Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Stone 

Fruits Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Strawberry Aerial Spray 0.1789 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Strawberry Ground Spray 0.1789 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Sugar Beet Aerial 

Low volume 

spray 

(concentrate) 

0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 WY120005 

(1) 

Sugar Beet Aerial Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Sugar Beet Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 14 62719-442 (1) 

Sweet 

Potato Aerial Spray 0.1491 1 0.1491 NS NS NS CA060026 (1) 

Sweet 

Potato Aerial Spray 0.1491 3 0.4473 NS NS NS MS060014,NC060003 (2) 

Sweet 

Potato Ground Spray 0.1491 1 0.1491 NS NS NS CA060026 (1) 

Sweet 

Potato Ground Spray 0.1491 3 0.4473 NS NS NS MS060014,NC060003 (2) 

Tree Nuts Aerial Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 
Page 40 of 45 

Use Site 

Aerial and/or 

Ground 

Application 

Identified by 

Equipment/Lab

el Restriction 

Application 

Method 

Type Desc 

Maximum 

Single 

Application 

Rate 

(lb/acre) 

Max # 

Apps / 

CC 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/CC 

(lb/acre) 

Max # Apps 

/ Year 

A. I. 

Max 

App 

Rate/Ye

ar 

(lb/acre) 

Minimum 

Retreatment 

Interval 

(days) 

Registration 

Numbers 

Tree Nuts Ground Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Turnip 

Greens Ground Spray 0.2386 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Walnut 

(english/bla

ck) 

Aerial Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

Walnut 

(english/bla

ck) 

Ground Spray 0.3579 NS NS NS 0.9543 10 62719-442 (1) 

 
Page 41 of 45 

APPENDIX C. Output from OPP EIIS Incident Database for Methoxyfenozide 
Page 42 of 45 

APPENDIX D. STIR Results for Evaluate Potential for Inhalation Risk to Birds and 

Mammals 

Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk 

This tool is designed to provide the risk assessor with a rapid method for determining the potential 

significance of the inhalation exposure route to birds and mammals in a risk assessment. 

 

Input 

Application and Chemical Information 

Enter Chemical Name Methoxyfenozide 

Enter Chemical Use 

Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y 

If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) ground 

Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 368 

Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 2.00E-08 

Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 0.25 

 

Toxicity Properties 

Bird 

Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 2250 

Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 

Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178 

Mammal 

Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 2000 

Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC50 (mg/L) 4.5 

Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4 

Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35 

 

Output 

Results Avian (0.020 kg ) 

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m3) 3.96E-04 

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 4.98E-05 

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 2.82E+01 

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 1.76E-06 Exposure not Likely Significant 

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.64E-02 

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 9.36E-04 Exposure not Likely Significant 

 

Results Mammalian (0.015 kg ) 

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m3) 3.96E-04 

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 6.26E-05 

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 2.68E+02 

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 2.34E-07 Exposure not Likely Significant 

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 3.32E-02 
Page 43 of 45 

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 1.24E-04 Exposure not Likely Significant 

 
Page 44 of 45 

APPENDIX E. 

SIP Results for Evaluate Potential Risk to Birds and Mammals from Drinking 

Water Exposure. 

Table 1. Inputs 

Parameter Value 

Chemical name Methoxyfenozide 

Solubility (in water at 25oC; mg/L) 3.3 

 

Mammalian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 2000 

Mammalian test species laboratory rat 

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian 

species 

 

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg-bw) 200 

Mammalian test species laboratory rat 

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian 

species 

 

Avian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 2250 

Avian test species northern bobwhite quail 

Body weight (g) of "other" avian species 

Mineau scaling factor 1.15 

 

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 1000 

Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 1000 

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for other bird species 

Body weight (g) of other avian species 

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for 2nd other bird 

species 

Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species 

 

Table 2. Mammalian Results 

Parameter Acute Chronic 

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 0.5676 0.5676 

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 1538.3211 153.8321 

Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0004 0.0037 

Conclusion* 

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals 

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals 

 

Table 3. Avian Results 

Parameter Acute Chronic 

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 2.6730 2.6730 

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 1620.9664 49.6126 

Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.0016 0.0539 
Page 45 of 45 

Conclusion* 

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for birds 

Drinking water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for birds 

 

*Conclusion is for drinking water exposure alone. This does not combine all routes of exposure. 

Therefore, when aggregated with other routes (i.e., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through 

drinking water may contribute to a total exposure that has potential for effects to non-target animals.